Posted on 09/28/2005 5:49:04 PM PDT by KStorm
SMU was probably a better law school back in the day, as when they had Eric Dickerson. We dont need any more inside players on Scotus however. Insiders on the court is why we have go along to get along justices who wont roll back the Warren legacy
interesting. I will remember your prediction here - first I heard this name I think - (Carol Lam). I am afraid your are right about immigration. It seems like lip service during elections now, as is fiscal responsibility.
"I'm getting tired of Texans being put, seeming, in every federal post."
USDA Sec. Mike Johanns - Iowa
Johanns grew up in Iowa Govenor of Nebraska
ARGH! I'm Blind!
This would be yet another betrayal by Bush, absent some miracle whereby this woman has kept her actual views secret for decades. No genuine conservative in the mold of Scalia or Thomas is going to get elected president of the State Bar Association. In all likelihood, we have another judge-politician on our hands, who wants to please people by eschewing principles that bite.
Why? And really, how credible is the ABA? They should be extremely credible, but I seem to remember that Pres. Bush said while he would listen to their input, it would not necessarily be the only input relied on.
You got it...Janice Rogers Brown, Tell your friends, e-mail the White House...
JRB will add some fun to the Senate process! We'll get to call Teddy Kennedy a racist every day! (among other things)
WAY BACK in the day, ABA actually used to be conservative, anticommunist, but not since the 60's, can you believe it?
It also creates threads on FR.
"No genuine conservative in the mold of Scalia or Thomas is going to get elected president of the State Bar Association"
all our Bar Association leaders do is whine for more money for legal aid, public defenders and judges; unlikely true conservatives could stomach doing that
Both of the individuals you mentioned do have the kind of credentials, and are conservatives, that we need. The credentials are necessary both for the quality of the court over time and for getting them confirmed. The conservativism is just damn necessary for the country.
BTW, I share your concerns over the border.
You may be right, I don't know. When I applied to law school some 29 years ago it was not on my radar screen as a national law school, which means it was not generally considered to be tier one or upper tier two.
We dont need any more inside players on Scotus however. Insiders on the court is why we have go along to get along justices who wont roll back the Warren legacy.
I understand the concern. I want a strong conservative nominee, just one with top academic and professional credentials. I don't think it helps our cause to nominate someone whose primary claim to fame is close connection to the President and who has not demonstrated the kind of legal mind necessary to be a good judge.
I think in his heart of hearts, Bush wants to nominate Gonzales, social conservatives be damned, because of Gonzales' personal loyalty to him primarily and secondarily because he wants a Hispanic on the USSC. I do not think he wants to engage that battle, because Gonazales is in a unique position in our republic's history in that he is despised by the left (I can hear it now, "TORTURER!") and the right (he's no social conservative in any shape, form or fashion).
I think Bush may be seriously considering Miers, again because this president puts a premium on personal loyalty.
But my prediction, based on the fact that he almost has to pick a woman to fill this vacancy, and the fact that he's in heat to put a Hispanic on the USSC ... Google the name Consuelo Callahan and see what you come up with.
Right...overlooked that. Thanks for the correction.
Just take a look at this list for a moment. http://www.abanet.org/scfedjud/ratings108.pdf
and the following letter from the ABA to Sen. Specter.
http://www.abanet.org/scfedjud/ratings108.pdf
The letter gives a good explanation of the peer review process.
More than a few conservatives....including Miguel Estrada and Priscilla Owen received a "well qualified" rating.
And, the ABA is quite credible. Political views are not considered by these ratings.
a technicality for sure, but better a husker than a hawkeye
Yeah yeah, and the last time, Judge Edith Clements was supposed to be Bush's choice for the SCOTUS. Drudge likes to scoop everyone. He hits a lot of shots. Oftentimes, he misses. I wouldn't be surprise if this one goes the way of the the Clements report.
Makes sense, though -- Bush probably knows a lot about how she thinks, but similar to Roberts, very little for the Dems to attack.
Drudge's problem is that his main source for "scoops" is the New York Times. Sure enough, the Slimes today has a story where they name Miers as a front runner for the nomination. When it comes to reporting on happening within the Bush Administration, Drudge would do better to rely on an Ouija board. No one in the administration gives the Times any real information, so all they can print is innuendo and misinformation.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.